tv [untitled] CSPAN June 8, 2009 12:30pm-1:00pm EDT
there, it is all self interest. host: how long have you been an independent? caller: it has been about maybe five years. i have been a republican, a democrat, now it seems like both parties basically, they talk a good game, but when you find out what they are doing, they are not doing anything for america. it even got to the point where ralph nader, some of the things he said sounded good to me. i remember him when ross perot was running. >> we are breaking away from this and take you live to the house floor speeches.
washington, d.c., june 8, 2009. i hereby appoint the honorable donna f. edwards to act as speaker pro tempore on this day . signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to 30 minutes and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 2:00 p.m. scheduled in the house, a plan to offer cash rebates to american who trade in older cars for newer, more efficient
models. state department programs including peacekeeping and a measure that would increase military and nonmilitary aid to pakistan. house and senate negotiators are trying to agree on a bill that allocates $100 million for additional war spending this year. live coverage when the house returns at 2:00 p.m. eastern. the senate continuing work on new tobacco regulation. of vote is scheduled at 5:30 p.m.. the senate has been waiting for agreement on the war spending bill. live coverage as always on cspan2. >> how c-span funded? >> private donations. >> taxpayers? >> i don't know. >> from public television? >> i don't know where comes from. >> contributions and donor. >> 30 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a
public service. no government mandate, no government money. >> a programming note, david simon, a crime reporter from the baltimore sun will talk about journalism and his work in tv, including his hit series "the wire." with the fan -- federal mandated transfer to dtv next week, we will get a status report from the fcc on how people prepare for the change. congressman joe barton and an activist group coordinator.
tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the communicators on c-span to. >> now a conversation about the obama administration, and its approach to executive pay. >> this story broke on friday about the white house appointing a pay czar. why are they naming somebody to this post? >> i think there has been a lot of pressure. there have been hundreds of billions of dollars into the financial industry, and you are seeing the same greedy behavior they have always exhibited. in recent years, there has been a problem with greed. make sure the company'ies who gt
assistance from the government, that they comply. host: will he oversee all the executive pay for companies that get federal bail out? guest: especially those who come back a couple of times, he will be able to take a close look and approve or disapprove, and request changes from what we heard. four other companies that have received funds from the tar tar program, -- tarp program, they will face restrictions. the obama administration has been trying -- it is a delicate balance. host: is there any precedent for this kind of position? guest: we have seen the
government step in before. it is a step beyond at least the finance industry, what we have seen in the past. especially because of public pressure, you will see a lot more desire, why are these guys making hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses, and their companies continue to destroy the economy? host: hothis announcement, a number of banks that received federal aid will be repaid the money as early as this week. why are they taking that step now? guest: they don't want to face executive compensation restrictions. the money they got from the government, especially last fall when there was no capital available to banks. the banks will say, washington
is interfering too much. we want to get out from under the umbrella. half of these companies would not exist if washington would not have stepped in. these companies, it is funny. guest: he oversaw $7 billion worth of pay outs to victims and victims' family. he talked to people, he was the man in charge. host: has congress, as a result of the bail out and other legislation, have they stipulated certain parameters for executive pay for companies that are getting these amounts
-- these funds? guest: yes. the aig bonus situation. they went further than the administration wanted. that is the problem but treasury head. trying to incorporate what congress wanted. -- that is the problem that treasury had. we are finding banks new way to pay, forcing changes in the way banks do it. host: is this a temporary position or just for the duration of the bail outs? guest: however long that will be. this is a complete revamp on how we oversee the financial markets. one of the key things we expect secretary geithner to testify about is the principle that
firms should get away from compensation systems, it encouraged people to -- stop the incentives to write these -- to put together financial products that are just leveraging your risk. host: these rules could be codified for companies? guest: it is more principles that regulators can go to a company and say your compensation system, you are encouraging bad behavior without any awareness of whether or not those mortgages will pay out. it will be more principle. for the first time, they are pushing the principle that risk is a problem. host: we will talk about new
concept -- executive compensation. florida on our republican line. caller: i have a question. how much is this individual being paid? host: are you talking about the man, mr. feinberg? caller: what is he being paid? guest: it has not been announced yet. once they do that, we will be able to see financial disclosures. host: his term will be special master.
north carolina on our independent line. caller: i was curious about with the bonuses that are paid out, it seems that if they are paying bonuses and doing what they were supposed to do, especially the banks would pay the executive for bonuses if they did not do their jobs. it feels like they did their job, got their bonuses and the bail out the needed. it seems like everybody is being rewarded. guest: that is the concern of law makers. that is why they enacted legislation that went farther than the administration wanted them to. there is concern about that, that is one of the reasons they want the principle where firms are not encouraging -- and
encouraged to give bonuses. caller: i think they ought to limit the ceo pay, and if you don't want to take the job, somebody else will take it. host: you are talking about all companies? guest: no one is saying we should set a specific level. you always hear this argument from the business community that we have to pay, we have to pay for the best people. i think there are probably a few folks who would come on board for less pay. host: the caller had talked about bonuses.
the stronger banks rights the wall street journal, they are set to move in a different direction. the fed is expected to say that goldman sachs, morgan saks -- morgan chase are set to give back. they are able to pay this back because they have seen money come back into their coffers. some of the people who work for those companies, they could help j.p. morgan or goldman sachs come back to profitability to the point where they can pay back this money. guest: i love the financial health of these firms that have been aided by accounting changes. nothing has been done with them. they are still seen on bank
balance sheets. they appear more healthy. government stress test and mark that strips -- stressful, really. -- were not that stressful, really. you are starting to see banks turned around because in large part because of the government aid. host: are their banks out there that are still in perilous condition? guest: the government policy is not to let them be in a perilous position. it is impossible to say. we have allowed them to account for insolvent assets. they are writing down 90¢ on the dollar.
host: i know you are the banking and finance reporter, what is the current level of excess ability to executive pay? guest: that is one thing that lawmakers want to address. you have seen some people on the ways and means committee talk about that before. these folks have a very low tax rate when they are getting hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses. i think that is another way lawmakers could eventually look to recoup some of these benefits. caller: my question is why does the obama administration, why
don't they said congress and representatives pay? they are not doing anything for the people. guest: one reason put in place, it gives them a point man to take on these issues of auto companies. partly a political demonstration that these are issues they consider important enough to appoint someone specifically to focus on them. host: he will also oversee the pay of the automobile companies. guest: right, gmac, gm -- all these firms. anyone who has received bailouts in the last six or seven months. host: here is a tweet -- a
comment on mr. feinberg. every american should see a giant red alert here. this is baltimore, md. on our democrats' caller: line good morning. i have a question for your guest. my question is, i wonder if mr. crittenden was aware that president obama as a center sponsored a bill to curb executive pay? guest: yes, i mean, heat -- go ahead. yes, heat as a senator on a number of issues sponsored legislation, mortgage bankruptcy -- caller: yes, i did here on npr this morning that in a couple of weeks it is expected that public-private partnerships are
buying toxic assets is expected to go forward. some people are stepping up to that. it sounded more encouraging. i thought that might be helpful. it seems like a lot of people think we're rescuing banks when will we are trying to do is rescue the economy. during the great depression one thing fdr did not do was rescue the banks. i think that is what kept us from falling off a cliff. hosguest: the belief we have sen since last fall starting with secretary paulson transitioning into the new administration was secretary geithner is that restoring liquidity in the financial system will have the effect of helping the broader economy. i don't think there is much disagreement about that, but there is a fine line.
how argue help the banks -- how part to help them? of the last few years we have seen regulatory capture were there's always this difference -- there is always this difference for the banks were they leverage up to 100 times and create all this risk. help the banks but help everyday folks for this legislation. host: when congress had just returned to from unifying much securities regulation under one regulator -- what can you tell us about that? guest: that will be really hard. politically, you have the securities exchange of one side and the commodities exchange on the other. you have derivatives, all these complicated financial products. you see the same things with
banks. you have four or five different regulators, a patchwork of oversight, some good, some terrible. to unify them will be quite difficult. barney frank has already suggested that it will be difficult to merge these agencies, banking regulators. the framework we have seen sort of leaking out a bit from the administration, at least a floating around capitol hill talks about things they want to do such as merging the sec and fdic, and things there will not be able to do. probably merging some of these agencies is not possible, but i think you'll see a more unified structure of regulation even if not in one agency. host: " the: "times" concerning
this paymaster -- the strongest oversight with mr. feinberg --it will come from the administration's compensation czar. he will actively that all executive compensation changes at the companies that have received more than one taxpayer lifeline. he will also have the power to veto compensation without bailout money. on thursday the house financial- services committee will hold a hearing to examine how compensation practices contributed to financial collapse. this is broadening the scope to companies outside of the ones having received financial rescue money. guest: yes, and from chairman frank, you will seek giving shareholders more rights. something for the past 25 years we have moved away from. shareholders have not really
been the owners for the past 25 years. you will see more shareholder rights and shareholder flexing their muscles. host: next on our independent line. caller: good morning, i would like to ask the reporter with his general political philosophy is. today we cannot count on a lot of our main press to tell us just that -- they generally just have an agenda. number two, what i believe is going on is institutionalized class warfare. if we decide to have the government set the standard of what people can be paid, that is the distribution of wealth. i don't think the capital system is made for that. also, i wanted to say that i believe the problem with the excessive pay going on is a lack
of integrity of the people in the high positions, along with the cultural attitude that has been adopted for the past 20 years. all of these problems can be traced, the derivatives, and the excessive compensation, it can be traced back to congress and our tax laws. i would like to hear what the gentleman has to say. thank you. guest: congress has no intention of putting specific pay standards, by saying company x can only pay executives to under thousand dollars per year -- that would never work. the outcry would be great. as much as the public -- and we saw with aig -- got very upset about executive pay, no one really wants the government coming in to set pay for everyone. that is a slippery slope.
there is a general feeling that we should not -- like with the mortgage companies. where they have the pay structure where the mortgages you wrote as a broker and helped to close, the more pay you would get. you have no incentive in that situation to make sure that those mortgages are good. you're just try to get more. so, we want to create a system for that sort of behavior is not encouraged. that is the goal of the policy- makers are talking about. not having a situation where people are encouraged to have a bad behavior. host: earlier the caller asked a question about the number of the czars. is there concern on capitol hill for the president appointing someone for this type of position and taking it out of the purview of congress? guest: that is a sneaky way to
have someone who is the point person who's not really an appointed official. the senate does not have to confirm the auto czar, the pay czar, so, yes, it is taking executive power and using it. congress, with all the members in congress they have plenty of powers, subpoena power, to get this information. there's a hearing thursday and house oversight committee on the bank of america. the ceo ken lewis will be called up to testify. congress still has the ability and a lot of oversight. host: to inverness, florida. caller: hello, i was wondering why gm does not look for merger instead of selling out hummer?
as an executive branch maybe they could put a limit on the president's spending. as a veteran i can hardly afford to go to the movie theater. host: we will talk a bit more about the auto industry in an upcoming segment, but go ahead, if you would like guest: when the government rescued the auto companies the key was putting together a program to move the company's ford with a new slimmed-down structure. seen some of these brands sold off this week expected when they received government host: aiaid. host: d.c. any parallels between the auto and -- do you see any parallels between the auto industries and of the banks?
guest: there has been this belief that we have to get the banks going again, get liquidity back into the system. it will start with lending. we have yet to see that. banks, lending has fallen again -- which you would expect to see and a recession. host: this viewer asks if this is strictly an american concern? regarding specifically at executive pay. guest: all these financial firms are global. goldman sachs -- these are global firms. a number of foreign banks do business here as well. it is global. every time the g-eight kids together, the top economic ministers get together, they will talk about these things. as part of a global regulatory landscape situation.
the talk about it all the time. they want to harmonize regulation. this is something you will see other finance ministers talk about. . . host: has the government moved to limit pay on hsbc officials? guest: they believe you don't want to set two hundred thousand dollars. i think there really is a fear of any country, no one wants to really say you can only make this much. there is widespread belief that
these structures were bonuses, getting a bonus when your company does horribly doesn't make sense. host: please turn down your tv. go ahead. caller: has michael read the reports that time magazine put out on the 25 worst people in this debacle? guest: no, i have not. caller: there were like seven people who work on this. it cleared up a lot of things for me. one of the things, was the -- i think it was a glass stiegel bill that was put in in the late 90's, and bill clinton signed it.